Miranda Devine – Tuesday,May 07,2013 (7:20pm)

WHATEVER becomes of John Singleton’s complaints of conflict of interest involving his former horse trainer, Gai Waterhouse, and her bookmaker son Tom and husband Robbie, the family arrangements have always been controversial.

Tim Blair – Tuesday,May 07,2013 (5:26am)

Much appreciated. Also appreciated is that Holmes’s correction was offered voluntarily. Unfortunately, the rest of last night’s show was devoted to Media Watch‘s confused belief that Andrew Bolt is somehow compromised by his television work. Click for Bolt’s dealings with his ABC inquisitor. Speaking of television and compromise, here’s none other than Jonathan Holmes:

To be honest I tend not to do that kind of flip, mocking take on ABC programs that I may do about other programs. If anyone says you don’t treat other programs the way you treat ABC programs, well, to some extent, that’s unavoidably true.

Labor’s attack ladies
try yet again to portray Tony Abbott as a woman-hater, this time by
jumping on what seems the accidental use of the Lee Kuan Yew-like phrase
“of that calibre” instead of “like that”:

“We do not educate women to higher degree level to deny them a career,” Mr Abbott said.
”If we want women of that calibre to have families, and we should, well we have to give them a fair dinkum chance to do so. That is what this scheme of paid parental leave is all about.”
Health Minister Tanya Plibersek said Mr Abbott’s comments were an
insight into “his lack of respect for low income workers and women in
particular”.
“Who exactly does Mr Abbott think are women of calibre? What does he
think about women who are child care workers, nurses and community
sector workers?” Ms Plibersek said.
“Are they of lower calibre than women who are law firm partners?”
Finance Minister Penny Wong took to Twitter to remark: “Am wondering who
Abbott thinks the women not of calibre are? A woman’s calibre is not
determined by what she earns.”

Do these women truly believe that’s what Abbott means? Or are they just trying to stir up hate?
Is this what they got into public life for?

Former CFMEU boss John Maitland didn’t make a good start in giving evidence at the ICAC corruption hearing:

A FORMER union boss at the centre of an inquiry into a mining licence
that made him millions has been caught lying in his opening evidence to a
corruption inquiry.
John Maitland, a former head of the CFMEU, has begun giving evidence to
the independent commission against corruption this morning, and was
immediately played a covertly recorded phone conversation with a friend
in which he revealed confidential details of an interview he gave with
corruption investigators last year.
The phone conversation in July 2012 was between Mr Maitland and friend
Arch Tudehope in which the two discussed specific questions asked by
ICAC investigators about Mr Maitland’s relationship with former NSW
Labor mining minister Ian Macdonald.
It is a criminal offence to divulge details of private ICAC questioning,
and Mr Maitland was asked whether he had discussed the details with
anyone. Mr Maitland denied he had.
After being played the tape and asked by counsel assisting Peter Braham SC asked: ”So you’ve already lied here this morning?‘’
Mr Maitland replied: “It appears so.”
“It not a great start?” Mr Braham asked.
“It doesn’t appear that way,” Mr Maitland replied.

At its meeting today, the Board decided to lower the cash rate by 25 basis points to 2.75 per cent, effective 8 May 2013.
The global economy is likely to record growth a little below trend this year, before picking up next year…
Growth in Australia was close to trend in 2012 overall, but was a bit
below trend in the second half of the year, and this appears to have
continued into 2013. Employment has continued to grow but more slowly
than the labour force, so that the rate of unemployment has increased a
little, though it remains relatively low.
With the peak in the level of resources sector investment likely to
occur this year, there is scope for other areas of demand to grow more
strongly over the next couple of years.

BILLIONAIRE businessman Clive Palmer has announced four more federal candidates for his United Australia Party (UAP).
The UAP candidates are senior business executive Clive Mensink for the
seat of Dickson, sales executive Craig Gunnis for Ryan, small business
owner Veronica Ford for Brisbane and IT executive Thor Prohaska for the
seat of Petrie.

Mensink is manager and a director of one of Palmer’s companies, Mineralogy. Gunnis is a manager of another Palmer enterprise, the Palmer Motorama Vintage Car Museum.
This from the billionaire who claims he’s campaigning against vested interests in politics.

Federal Treasurer Wayne Swan says the budget revenue has taken a $7.5
billion “sledgehammer” hit because of twin factors - a high dollar and
lower terms of trade…
“That’s caused a hit, like a sledgehammer to revenues in the budget,
since the mid-year update of something like $7.5 billion,” Mr Swan told
ABC TV ...

The “bottom line for the budget bottom line” is this: the amount of tax
revenue the Government has collected so far this financial year is
already $7.5 billion less than was forecast last October.
Treasury now estimates that this reduction will increase to around $12 billion by the end of the financial year.

Senator Wong also confirmed this morning the revenue shortfall for this financial year would be “significant”.
“The impact in the current financial year, between last year’s budget
and this year’s budget looks to be is in the order of $17 billion...”

So in less that four weeks the government has gone from announcing a shortfall of $7.5 billion to $12 billion to $17 billion.
And next week?
This is utterly bizarre. Utterly chaotic. What has changed - twice - in the past month to justify such dramatic revisions?
UPDATE
A partial explanation: Wong has added to Gillard’s $12 billion the
$4billion write-down from last October’s mid-year forecasts, and then
added $1 billion extra.
From Swan’s MYEFO announcement last October:

UPDATE
Is this the extra $1 billion Wong tacked onto the projected shortfall? Once again, Labor expected more than it got:

THE government has fallen about $1 billion short of the $3bn revenue windfall it had hoped to reap from the sale of valuable wireless spectrum to the nation’s leading telecoms companies.
After two weeks of secret bidding, Telstra, Optus and TPG Telecom have
forked out a combined $2bn to acquire wireless spectrum in the
government’s digital dividend auctions.

Tony Abbott’s
ludicrously generous parental leave scheme - to be funded by a new levy -
is rightly under fire. Abbott has also signed up for another levy, this
time to pay for a disability package proposed by Julia Gillard.
A terrible start for a party which will go into government in September
needing to fight what seems an inevitable fall in our standard of
living.
So Joe Hockey at least ramps up the rhetoric:

The [Productivity Commission] estimated that a further $6.5 billion
(net) would be required in addition to the $7.1bn already spent annually
on people with a disability - a 90 per cent increase. The Australian
government actuary, however, has reworked the figures and suggests $10bn
would be required, a 140 per cent increase.

Then there’s definition creep:

The government has agreed to fund the Productivity Commission
recommended number of 411,250 people… In addition, a further 81,740
would receive early intervention support.
The ... profoundly disabled was a starting point in arriving at the
commission figure. Others were ruled in or out on the basis of the
permanence of the disability. Taxpayers should be aware that, in
addition to profoundly disabled, the ABS estimates that there are
350,000 who have “severe core activity limitation”, many of whom have
permanent conditions. This means that many are knocking on the door of
the scheme. The pressure in future to include some of them will be
immense…
Governments have failed to keep the number of Disability Support Pension
claimants in check. The numbers have almost doubled in the past 20
years, and yet the rate of occupational injuries and disease has
decreased dramatically from 21 per 1000 to 13 per 1000 since 1997.
The medicos who wave through the pensioner may wave through the disabled.

The prime minister’s invention of John to explain the government’s budget position ... actually damned the government…
She started her little story by describing John ``employed in the same job throughout the last 20 years.’’
Reality? Who in 2013 Australia has been in the same job since 1993? ...
Yet despite that, to put it politely, lack of advancement, this John was
given ``sizeable bonuses’’ from 2003 through 2007, each and every year.
Why?
Then they stopped and he was told his income would now be going up by 5 per cent ``over the years to come’’…
First, again, why? Just for turning up to work each day? In the world of
Gillard and Canberra, business success is taken as a given....
But true, now John’s been told he won’t get those promised increases for
the next few years, but after that his income would get back up to
where he ``was promised it would be.’’…
Only someone living in the cosy world of Canberra - on your money -
could project such a picture of guaranteed, literally take-it-to-the
bank - future prosperity… With no risk of his employer going broke…
Then the spectacular coup de grace: Gillard’s ludicrous projection of
what is suggested for John. That he sell his home and car, drop his
private health insurance ... and switch to ``two minute noodles!’’
Reality check, inside Gillard’s own bizarre fantasy. Her projection doesn’t have his income falling, it just stops going up.
Why on earth would anyone suggest he take such ludicrous actions?
No-one’s suggesting that she and Swan should do anything remotely the
equivalent with the budget…
And why on earth would he have to go the bank to get a loan, to get through to ``the time of higher income?’’
If he just brings his excess spending into line with his still very high
income; after those years of big bonuses and then 5 per cent wage
rises?

UPDATE
Cassandra Wilkinson introduces “John” to Don, and hopes the latter will
inspire John to a more giving, dutiful and prudent life. Lovely piece.

With Newspoll leaving Labor down at 44 to the Coalition’s 56, it’s clear
Julia Gillard can promise all she likes now - even a popular disability
scheme - and it doesn’t matter.
In fact, it’s also clear that she’s being comprehensively outplayed by Tony Abbott, who sacrificed economic credibility by backing her levy but cemented his grip on victory:

The Prime Minister’s attempt to politicise the levy to fund DisabilityCare and jam Tony Abbott has backfired.
The Opposition Leader has politically neutralised one of Labor’s pillars
for re-election and denied the Prime Minister a point of conflict and
differentiation…
Gillard’s ploy of announcing a levy to fund the scheme, which she
thought Abbott would oppose, was designed to lock an “uncaring” and
“callous” Coalition into opposing DisabilityCare funding through the
election campaign and build on Labor’s strength in the area.
Abbott’s acceptance of the levy - an obvious political response -
destroyed that differentiation and his challenge to legislate
immediately put Gillard on the back foot. Suddenly Abbott was ensuring
certainty for the disabled.

It’s blown all our money, so the Gillard Government breaks yet another promise:

Finance Minister Penny Wong confirmed plans to drop the Family Tax Benefit Part A scheme on Sky News this morning.
“We are not in a position to proceed with the boost to the family tax
benefits as a result of the revenue challenge the government is facing
and the nation is facing,” she said…
The payment, which would have gone to 1.5 million families, was linked
to the the mining tax, which is raising less money than originally
forecast.

Last week it broke its promise not to increase the Medicare levy. All that money gone, and on what?
Despite its tax take this financial year rising more than 7.5 per cent,
the Government spent all that and lots more that it foolishly expected:

The four years of surpluses I announce tonight are a
powerful endorsement of the strength of our economy, resilience of our
people, and success of our policies.
In an uncertain and fast-changing world, we walk tall — as a nation confidently living within its means
This Budget delivers a surplus this coming year, on time, as promised, and surpluses each year after that, strengthening over time.
It funds new cost of living relief for Australian families.
It helps businesses invest, compete and adapt to an economy in transition.
And it finances bold new policies to help Australians with a disability, the aged, and those who can’t afford dental care.
It does these things for a core Labor purpose:
To share the tremendous benefits of the mining boom with more Australians…
The deficit years of the global recession are behind us. The surplus years are here…
Across the budget, by saving and redirecting $33.6 billion, we’re balancing the books.
Making room for $5 billion in new payments to households…
With solid growth in real GDP of 3¼ per cent in 2012-13 and 3 per cent in 2013-14…
Unemployment is forecast to remain low at 5½ per cent in the next two years; official interest rates are lower now than at any time under our predecessors; and we have an investment pipeline of over$450 billion in the resources sector alone…
This has contributed to a deficit in 2011?12 of $44 billion, and means net debt will now peak at 9.6 per cent of GDP, just a tenth of the level of the major advanced economies.
Delivering surpluses when we have less tax revenue means we need to make substantial savings to pay for new initiatives.
It is these responsible decisions which return the Budget to a $1.5 billion surplus in 2012-13, and growing every year after that…
So tonight, from the firm foundations of a surplus budget, we announce new policies to spread the benefits of this boom…
I am proud to announce a new Spreading the Benefits of the Boom package; $3.6 billion to share the proceeds of the mining tax with families and small businesses…
At the core of this package is $1.8 billion in extra support for families through more generous payments from July next year.
More than 1.5 million families will benefit from increases to
Family Tax Benefit Part A, with nearly half taking home an extra $600 a
year.…
Madam Deputy Speaker, the super reforms funded by the mining tax will help more Australians secure a better retirement, and give those on low incomes a better deal…
The National Broadband Network is transforming our economy, and our $36 billion Nation Building programs are improving our road, rail and port networks.

Has any post-war Budget proved to be so catastrophically wrong and deceitful in so many ways so fast?

Jonathan Holmes last night devoted most of Media Watch last night to proving me right - that it is a platform for the Left.
For a start, would he have spent so much time attacking the views of a
journalist of the Left as he did my own? Would he ever attack a
journalist for being as critical of the political bent of, say, News
Ltd, as I have that of the ABC?
I’ve never seen him do so and I suspect I never will, to judge from Holmes’ past comments:

He really doesn’t know that Adams was for decades a vocal member of
Labor and a hater of “Tories”? That Jones is a warming evangelist? That
Kelly is vehemently for same-sex marriage? It’s hard to imagine what
more some of his presenters could do to advertise their political or
ideological leanings or beliefs. Radio National host Jonathan Green
actually hosted a party to celebrate the fall of John Howard, hanging up
a Howard pinata for guests to bash with a stick.
And last night Holmes revealed his personal views on me (too inclined to
categorise the Left), on the Left/conservative battle (we Leftists are
just being rational), on ABC hosts (one of us believes in free speech
and another in free markets), and global warming (the science is
overwhelming and only ideological warriors would quibble).
It was, in short, the kind of show no conservative would ever have put to air.
But I won’t go through all those arguments again. I dealt with them in an exchange of emails with Holmes yesterday which you can read here.
What I will do instead is list the factual errors and misrepresentations Holmes perpetrated last night.
What Holmes got wrong:

But there are some – like News Ltd columnist and blogger Andrew Bolt, for example – who reckon we stuff up every week

False. I have never said - and do not believe - Media Watch stuffs up “every week”. This is Holmes not describing but caricaturing - the very thing he is accusing me of doing.

... or at least, that neither I, nor any of my predecessors, ever say the things that he would say, if only he had the job.

My successor, who will not be Andrew Bolt but Paul Barry, had this to say next morning…

Paul Barry: I would certainly describe myself as to the left of Andrew
Bolt, so on that basis I am left-wing. But in no other basis do I think
I’m left-wing. I believe in the free market, I believe in freedom of
speech, I believe actually in privatisation, I believe in an awful lot
of things that would make me a free-marketeer and, you know, a liberal.
So I don’t think that’s a valid criticism, and I have never decided
anything by ideology… I look at the facts, I analyse what I see before
me, and I call it as I see before me ...

That is a deeply misleading argument. Let me demonstrate: I would
describe myself as more conservative than Paul Barry. But I believe in
progressive taxation, legalised abortion and the right to membership of
trade unions. I’m actually an agnostic and twice worked for Labor. I
believe in an awful lot of things that would make me, you know, of the
Left. I have never decided anything by ideology. I look at the facts,
and I call it as I see before me. Only yesterday on the blog and on air I
attacked Tony Abbott’s parental leave scheme.
But here is the difference. I openly declare the philosophical framework that informs my views. Barry does not.
Two more points. Note that Barry now regards freedom of speech as a
hall-mark issue of conservatives, not the Left. That’s a worry. And
note that of Media Watch’s seven hosts, Barry is the only one
Holmes tries to suggest might not be of the Left. He can’t say of
himself. Or of David Marr. Of of Stuart Littlemore. Or of Monica Attard.
Or of… and on and on.

For example, in Andrew Bolt’s eyes, I’m apparently less left-wing than any of my esteemed predecessors in this chair

Andrew Bolt: I even shot a promo for him once saying that Jonathan, in
my view, was the least biased of the hosts ... But, but, he still is of
the Left… ... for example, he does get on his global warming hobby-horse
at times, I think that’s fair enough.

False. I did not say Holmes was “less Left-wing” than other Media Watch hosts.
I said precisely what I am quoted as saying - that he has been less
biased, as in tried harder to be fair. In this case, however, he gave in
to his worst instincts.

Now, Andrew Bolt and I disagree about global warming.
But to me, either the vast majority of the scientists who study this
stuff are right, or they’re not. It’s a question of evidence, not
politics.

Misleading, and constructively false. To me global warming is a
question of evidence indeed, which is why I present so much of it on
this blog. But is it so for Holmes? Note he does not say what it is that
we disagree on, and does not say what the “vast majority of the
scientists who study this stuff” say. That “vast majority” would tell
Holmes that there has been no statistically significant warming for at
least 15 years. That is a question of evidence, not politics. Why has
Holmes never conceded this fact?

Yet whether or not you accept the reality of anthropogenic climate
change seems to have become a test of whether you’re on the right or the
left. Why, I don’t know, and I profoundly wish that weren’t so.

Holmes by implication suggests I am the one applying this test, and the
global warming faithful are not. It is true, accepting conclusions
based on unquestionable evidence should be a test not of Left vs Right
but of reason vs unreason. But when the evidence is treated as
irrelevant or hostile, it is fair to ask what else might be driving
people to believe as they do. And there seems to me little doubt that
political ideology is a huge driver of belief here. Why else is it that
the more Left wing the party, the more fervent its belief in warming
seems to be? The Greens are more stridently warmist than Labor, which is
more so than the Liberals. The same phenomenon seems true in all
Western countries.

And here’s another issue that seems to divide left and right, when it shouldn’t...the freedom of the press.
It’s a topic about which Andrew Bolt feels strongly – and he he seems to think that marks him out from the left…

Free Speech is Under Threat
Never has the Australian media faced a threat as serious as this.
— Herald Sun, 14th September, 2011

That was back in September 2011, when Senator Stephen Conroy announced the Finkelstein Inquiry into print media regulation.
Those who had claimed that the Howard government threatened free speech were missing in action, Bolt claimed…

How loud they were back when there was no real threat, and only a Liberal Prime Minister to mock…
Where are these people now that the threat is real, and the politicians
who rule us openly say they want to use state power to persecute
journalists who criticise them?
— Herald Sun, 14th September, 2011

Two weeks later, a Federal court judge found that Andrew Bolt had breached the Racial Discrimination Act.
Bolt saw it, of course, as a dangerous limitation on his freedom of
speech – and he framed it as conservatives versus ‘the
multiculturalists’…
Well, Andrew, for what it’s worth, and much as I disliked your original
columns, I called the court’s finding “a profoundly disturbing
judgment”.
On the ABC’s Drum website, I wrote this :

It creates one particular area of public life where speech is regulated
by tests that simply don’t apply anywhere else, and in which judges -
never, for all their pontifications, friends of free speech - get to do
the regulating.
— ABC Online, The Drum, 30th September, 2011

Maybe that means I’m not a lefty - or maybe, that people don’t fit neatly into Andrew’s boxes.

False dichotomy. It takes a collectivist to assume that a few dissenters
disprove a generality. It is also a slur and false to again caricature
me as someone who thinks everyone of the Left has identical views.
The facts: It was the Greens that called for an inquiry to punish the
“hate media” for “bias”, especially in coverage of global warming. It
was Labor which held that inquiry, backed by many journalists of the
Left and staffed by academics of the Left. It was Labor which recently
proposed draconian laws against a free press. It was academics of the
Left who cheered them on. It was Labor who proposed draconian
anti-discrimination laws limiting free speech. Again, academics and
many journalists of the Left cheered them on, as did the Human Rights
Commission. It was a Labor-drafted law that had me found guilty of
expressing an unlawful opinion, and it is the Liberal party which
proposes now to amend it.
True, Holmes did criticise the judgement, but he would know as well as I
do that on the Left he was one of the few. The AWU’s Paul Howes also
spoke out, for which I give him great credit. But so marked is the
Left’s betrayal of free speech that new Media Watch host Paul
Barry cites his support for free speech as evidence that he is not
entirely of the Left. And Holmes even quotes him doing so, yet fails to
draw the obvious conclusion.

But eighteen months later, when Communications Minister Stephen Conroy
dropped his half-baked media regulation proposals on us, Andrew Bolt
added his own special angle to the general condemnation…
No, Stephen, we don’t need a media supercop

The only real threat to diversity of opinion is one Mr Conroy won’t
discuss: the vast expansion of the Left-leaning and government-funded
ABC.
— Herald Sun, 14th March, 2013

As that great conservative hero, Ronald Reagan, famously said: “There you go again”.

This is Holmes arguing not with evidence but a sneer. Does he dispute
the ABC is extending its reach? Does he dispute it is government-funded,
and giving away for free what other media outlets must charge for to
survive? Does he seriously dispute, as a Leftist himself, the ABC leans
to Left? Why does he not engage with that argument?

Now Andrew Bolt, we understand, is one of the few journalists that Ms Rinehart respects and listens to.
He presents a program on the Ten Network, in which she is a major shareholder.
But the toughest thing he has written about [Rinehart issuing a
subpoena to a Fairfax journalist to discover her source] to date is this
...

For a major shareholder of Fairfax and board member at Channel 10 to
take action which could ultimately see one of her company’s own
journalists jailed is indeed a terrible look.
— Herald Sun, 16th March, 2013

But, he goes on to argue, this is not an attack on free speech. And he
frames the argument, as usual, in terms of left versus right.

False. And a gross misrepresentation. I did not frame the argument over the subpoena as Left versus Right. I accused Eureka Street of doing so. As I said:

So why is Eureka Street going to town on this issue while staying silent
on a far broader attack on a free press and the free speech - an attack
not by an individual but by a government, and not on one journalist but
all?

Again, Holmes misrepresented my argument in order to present a
caricature of a hypocritical Right-winger, betraying his principles to
please his proprietor.
Except, of course, Rinehart is not my proprietor, and I did indeed
criticise her actions, not once but three times. If Rinehart did indeed
do as Holmes smirked and listened to me, she would have dropped that
subpoena.

Come on Andrew. Where’s the moral outrage? You’re normally so good at that.

Come on, Jonathan. Where is the integrity? Where the honesty? You’re normally so ... No, strike that.

CHRIS UHLMANN, PRESENTER: Joe Ludwig, welcome.
JOE LUDWIG, MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE: Welcome. Pleased to meet you again.
CHRIS UHLMANN: You say that the community can have confidence that 99
per cent of live export animals won’t be abused on their way to
slaughter. Where do you get that figure from?
JOE LUDWIG: I’ve got complete confidence - and in fact I’d go further and say even 99.9....
CHRIS UHLMANN: Well as you’ve just said that 99.9 per cent of animals
are not abused on their way to slaughter, where do you get that figure
from? Is it yours or is it the department’s, is it based on an
exhaustive survey or is it a sample?
JOE LUDWIG: What it is is the number of complaints that we receive…
CHRIS UHLMANN: Sure, minister. Can I stop you for a moment? I’m just
trying to track down where you get this figure 99.9 per cent from. It’s
an extraordinary degree of certainty. Where’s the data from?
JOE LUDWIG: It’s the confidence that I can inform you and the confidence
that the statistics that the audits which are on the website
demonstrate; again, it’s analogous, it’s about having confidence that
this system delivers animal welfare outcomes. That’s the confidence I
have in the system.

Senator Brandis spoke of his relief at the government’s abandonment of
its plans to create statutory media regulation and its withdrawal of
what he called “bizarrely titled” anti-discrimination laws, which
proposed to make expression of opinion actionable on the grounds that it
might be insulting or offensive to other citizens and to reverse the
onus of proof.
He warned that at the time the media laws were withdrawn from
parliament, new legislation for the Australia Council was introduced
that removed freedom of artistic expression as one of the values to be
protected by the council…
“Intolerance is back in vogue; indeed, if you are a social engineer of
left-wing activist of a particular hue, then intolerance of those whose
thinking does not conform to your agenda is not a defect; it is a emblem
of righteousness.”
Senator Brandis was bemused that last Friday’s press freedom dinner in
Sydney, sponsored by the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance, did not
celebrate the defeat of plans for a statutory regulator.
He will attack comments made to him and opposition communications
spokesman Malcolm Turnbull at the function by former Fairfax journalist
David Marr over the Andrew Bolt case, as well as speeches by outgoing
Media Watch host Jonathan Holmes and MEAA head Chris Warren.

UPDATE
Reader Ancient Marriner on a very ABC problem:

THE ABC says the decision to take Sydney TV
newsreader Juanita Phillips off air on Friday night due to a conflict of
interest was made “in the usual course” of business. Phillips was
replaced as reader of the Friday night bulletin in NSW because of her relationship with federal minister Greg Combet, who
was to be featured after that day giving evidence to the Independent
Commission Against Corruption about his links with former CFMEU boss
John Maitland.

Meanwhile, deep discussions about Reconciliations, constitutional
recognitions, treaties, social justice, disadvantage and ‘negative
social indicators’ continue, a type of national conversation that Peter
Sutton dismisses as “yabber”. Professor Sutton is a linguist and
anthropologist with a lifetime’s work for Aboriginal progress. He
writes, “Such [bureaucratic] language…moves in a territory somewhere
between euphemism, banality and propaganda. A murdered mother is not
‘disadvantaged’ – she has lost her life.”
Reconciliation, he says, has now “attracted the hideous Orwellian
language of management-speak. In glossy-brochure land, in a galaxy far,
far away, we were to read about governance, capacity building,
partnerships, whole of government, benchmarks, stakeholders, leadership,
targets, measureable outcomes, role models – and so it goes…It is the
language of managerialist welfarism. But if you believe the media
releases, it’s the Breakfast of Champions. And where is our Kurt
Vonnegut when we need him?”
To pad out these official narratives, bureaucrats now insert colorful
“Case Studies”, each involving an individual Aborigine who has become a
success story thanks to Program XYZ. Of course, there is never a case
study involving failures. Suggested case studies of failure:

In Alice Springs, there is quite a gap to be
closed, with Aboriginal women there 80 times more likely to be
hospitalised after assault than women living anywhere else.
There is so much persistent ear disease in the communities that
40% (urban) and 70% (remote) Aborigines have hearing loss and
difficulties.
More than a third of the Indigenous children under 14 are in
over-crowded housing. In remote communities, more than half the children
live over-crowded.
About a third of the housing is also deficient in washing, sanitation
and food storage and cooking facilities.[8] Even where new building and
repair programs were active in the NT, housing occupancy would fall on
average only from “the high to the early-teens” – presumably from about
18 to 13 people per house.
The rate of abuse and neglect confirmations nationally for
Indigenous children under 17 years has risen from 2.2% of the Indigenous
child population in 2002-03 to 4.2% in 2011-12. Protection orders
similarly have risen from 2.3% to 5.5%.
In the NT in the decade to 2010, child removals grew from 175 to
555, a 215% increase, including a 40% increase in 2008-10. Worse,
removals are forecast to escalate while availability of Aboriginal
carers diminishes.

The normally level-headed Productivity Commission cites one bizarre
finding that, despite appalling living conditions in remote communities,
the settlements “also possessed protective factors that can safeguard
children and families from psychological distress, such as spirituality
and connection to land, family and culture.

- 43 per cent say they usually take a ‘’good deal’’ of interest in politics, but just 36 per cent say they are now interested.
- 36 per cent say they have little or no interest in this year’s federal election.
- 58 per cent say the quality of federal leadership is ‘’noticeably worse’’ that it used to be.

UPDATE
Newspoll says three quarters of voters like Gillard’s disability scheme, but it’s done nothing to make them vote for her:

According to the latest Newspoll survey, conducted exclusively for The
Australian on the weekend, the Coalition’s primary vote is virtually
unchanged from two weeks ago on 47 per cent as is Labor’s on 31 per
cent. The Coalition’s lift of one point and Labor’s fall of one point
were both within the margin of error and the Greens and “others” were
unchanged on 10 and 12 per cent respectively. Based on preference flows
at the 2010 election, the Coalition has kept a clear election-winning lead with 56 per cent to Labor’s 44 per cent.

===Determination will set you apart from the dreamers.
===
4 her
===
===

Interest rates now below what Wayne Swan referred to as "emergency rates"! What's that say about the state of the economy?

===A brilliant illustration of why Keynesian economics fails. Government finance is not a zero sum game. Decreased regulation has often improved business outlook. - ed
===
===
===IS IT WELL WITH YOUR SOUL?

Is it well with you? Is it well with your husband? Is it well with your child? And the Shunammite woman answered,it is well. She was in deep pain over the dearth of her son but still picks courage to tell the man of God that,it is well.Today,i urge you to put your heavy load on Jesus and say to Him,it is well.

I am living, but I’m not doing the living, Paul cried out. “I’m dead. Christ is alive, and I am watching Him live His amazing life through me”. And then Paul gives us God’s definition of love: He says, “He loved me, and gave Himself for me.” That’s love: God giving Himself away for those who do not deserve it, cannot repay it, and may not understand it. That same Paul, in the midst of years of imprisonment, persecution, hardship, and the facing of certain death, used a prison cell as his personal post office, and wrote letters from his heart to the hearts of those outside who were wondering what kind of fear and frustration Paul was suffering from inside those cells of death.But Paul did not see it that way.He did not complain of his hardship.I believe that in his heart,he said,it is well.Today I say to all of you reading my message that,it is well with my soul.God bless you.
===
===Architect proposes disguising gas power station as a "green mountain"

Treasurer Mike Baird today welcomed the reaffirmation of NSW’s triple-A credit rating by Moody’s and said it was an endorsement of the NSW Government’s strong fiscal strategy.

“Today’s announcement by Moody’s confirms that the NSW Government is delivering strong, stable and responsible economic management,” said Mr Baird.

“The NSW Government has been working hard to protect its Triple-A credit rating. We have taken a number of difficult decisions to address the massive hit to our revenues and to control the State’s expenses, and we welcome the endorsement of this approach.”

Moody’s report states: “ New South Wales’ ratings reflect its diverse economic base, considerable budget flexibility, and secure and predictable grants from the Commonwealth. The ratings also take into account the state’s commitment to achieving budgetary redress over the medium term through a reduction in expenditure growth.

“While our tough decisions have not been popular, they have enabled us to put more jobs on the frontline, to invest in the infrastructure needed across this state, and to prioritise funding for major reforms like the NDIS and Gonski,” said Mr Baird.

“It’s pleasing that Moody’s has acknowledged the strength of NSW’s rating compared to most of the other states and territories.

“The positive impact of our recent ports transaction on strengthening our balance sheet has also been recognised, but it remains a financial balancing act.

“We inherited $55 billion of net debt, a $30 billion infrastructure backlog, and before the last Budget, NSW lost $5.2 billion in GST revenue.

“Responsible economic management is not easy, but this Government will continue to make the hard decisions, and the right decisions, to see our state’s finances return to a sustainable position,” Mr Baird said.
===I support live Cattle Exports, I support uranium mining and I support Coal Seam Gas. People who want to feel good, are intent on destroying productive industries that make money and provide the Government's with revenue through taxes. These are the same people who want to increase welfare payments and Government spending. How can people expect to cut the Government's revenue by shutting down things that make money and at the same time increase spending? Zaya Toma
===
4 her
===Romeo and Juliet
===
===
===
===
===♥ Spring Cleaning Recipe for the Grout ♥

Do you need more strength and joy in your life? The Bible tells us that in God’s presence there is fullness of joy — the most abundant and complete. And when you have His joy, you have His supernatural strength. There’s nothing that can come against you when you are filled with the strength and joy of the Lord.

Notice this verse says that strength and joy are found in His sanctuary. One translation says they are found “where He is.” And do you know “where He is?” His Spirit is alive in every believer, but in His Word He promises that He inhabits, or manifests, in the praises of His people.So praise Him all the time.God bless you.

Abba Father, I bless You today.I adore You,I worship You.I bless Your Holy name. I thank You for Your goodness in my life. Thank You for filling me with Your strength and joy. I praise and worship You today and always, in Jesus’ name. Amen.

===
===Some of the Art on our salon walls. — at Colin Moxey Hairdressing.
===NASA's newest rover won't be exploring another planet, as the rover will stay close to home and explore Greenland's ice sheets to better understand how they form, and how quickly they may be melting. http://oak.ctx.ly/r/4oq5

Here, a prototype of the rover, GROVER, minus its solar panels, was tested in January 2012 at a ski resort in Idaho.
===
==="Will you take the path of ease?Or will you choose a road filled with uncertainty and adventure?

Will you wilt under criticism?Or will you carry on with conviction?

When it's tough will you give up?Or will you be relentless?"

I heard these words spoken at a graduation ceremony today, the only words to click in my mind from the entire 1.5 hour event. CHARACTER DETERMINES DESTINY. Ali Kadhim
===Quick Pix: Judy Garland w/Video

Judy Garland (born Frances Ethel Gumm; June 10, 1922 – June 22, 1969) was an American actress, singer and vaudevillian. Described by Fred Astaire as “the greatest entertainer who ever lived” and renowned for her contralto voice, she attained international stardom throughout a career that spanned more than 40 years as an actress in musical and dramatic roles, as a recording artist and on the concert stage. Respected for her versatility, she received a Juvenile Academy Award and won a Golden Globe Award as well as Grammy Awards and a Special Tony Award. She was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Actress for her role in the remake of A Star is Born and for the Best Supporting Actress for her performance in the 1961 film Judgment at Nuremberg. She remains the youngest recipient (at 39 years of age) of the Cecil B. DeMille Award for lifetime achievement in the motion picture industry.
===You are looking at some of the strongest boys, girls, men, and ladies we know in this area. Those who are devoted to becoming the best they can be through any and all circumstances. No complaints, no excuses, only hard work will be accepted. Pain is their friend and weakness is their enemy. ✊❤ #warriormentality #team9lives #9livesparkour
===God wants you to know and believe that He is wholly on your side, defending and taking care of you! Find out more in today's devotional and be blessed!http://bit.ly/12H0UDa
===In this video excerpt from the message of the year, catch a glimpse of why you can expect a bright future. Know that God will open and shut the right doors for your provision and protection!http://josephprince.com/
===For the believer, God’s throne is not a throne of judgment. It is a throne of grace (Heb 4:16), a throne of unmerited favor.
===For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous. —Romans 5:19

Beloved, because your righteousness from the Lord is not based on what you’ve done, but what He has done at Calvary, you cannot lose your righteousness. And because you are righteous, healing and provision—blessings that belong to the righteous—belong to you! When you realize that you cannot earn your righteousness, you’ll realize that your failures cannot cause you to lose the righteousness you have in Christ either. Beloved, you are forever righteous, and therefore forever qualified for God’s blessings of healing, wholeness, good success and long life! Amen!http://josephprince.com/
===

Hi everyone! Here's the MichelleMalkin.com newsletter for May 6th. Enjoy!

Translate

Subscribe To

Followers

Translator

About Me

I'm author of History in a Year by the Conservative Voice aka History of the World in a Year by the Conservative Voice.

I'm the Conservative Voice.

I'm looking to make contact with those who might use my skill.

I have an m-audio mobile pre amp fed by the audiotechnica 2041sp condensor mic pack. Prior to 15/4/06, I'd used a Shure sm-58 that required a nuclear blast to register a sound or the internal mic of my aged imac, which has a penchance to recording my breathing. I also used a Griffin itrip, until the community convinced me it was not hiding my talent as well as the other mics.

I am a Writer and an occasional Math Teacher (Sir, what's the occasion?). I like to sing, having no instrumental talent (cannot even clap in time, and yes, I'm aware singing badly IS obnoxious).

I have performed the finale to Les Miserables before an audience of 500. I have also sung before a similar audience (students, parents) renditions of 'I Will' (Beatles), 'Mr Cairo' (Jon Vangelis) and 'I am Australian' (Seekers). Now I seek another profession because the audience hates me ..